• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

I took the plunge

pks1414

pks1414

Messages
406
......and I may regret it. I thought that given a recent review and having seen some of the objects (and Aircraft) that can be produced by FSDS, I went and purchased. Talk about baffled, perhaps I have just become used to Gmax, which in fairness took time, but I cannot find any really good tutorials for the basics that to be honest I can produce in Gmax in seconds, you know, create a building with eaves and stuff, a collapse function :confused: I have been trying to build a bridge with a square arch, I cannot see how you create a box with more than one section, all I get is a box that I cannot arch.

I'm sure there are ways and means but consideriing how long its been around, there doesn't seem a fat lot about.

Are there any FSDS gurus out there who can point me in the right direction, at the moment its back to gmax :)
 
Hi,

I think you will see that some things are just done different in FSDS and it seems like you are know thinking in GMax-ways of doing stuff. The reverse of this has given a lot of people trouble when they tried to learn GMax for the first time, as they tried to do everything the same as in FSDS.

It is a long time ago that I used FSDS, but if I remember correct there are no multi-segment boxes in there. A box is just a box.

I guess switching from GMax to FSDS, will take you some time to adapt to the different way of thinking. Just like a switch from FSDS to GMax does.
 
Its hard to understand what benefits you'll have learning fsds if you know gmax, unless someday (vista perhaps) fsds will be the only functional fs cad.

Otherwise, I know of no reason to learn fsds.



Bob
 
One of the reasons was to have a go at building an aircraft in future, which according to a recent review seemed to have benefits. However I must admit that comparing the two, Gmax cetainly does have far more dare I say simple ways of doing things.

Having spent 29 quid I would be extremely happy for somebody to put me right :)
 
I exchanged emails with Brian Fletcher regarding his review with just this type of circumstance in mind. Sorry, but I think his enthusiasm has sent you down a bit of a frustrating path.

He made it clear in his email back to me that his review was meant for people that never could get gmax to work.

Best,
Bob
 
I was frustrated with a box and no sections, until I learned to use an extruded template and add the sections I wanted. One must be sure to flip all polygons when the template is complete. I don't do aircraft but have had much success with FSDS in desigining buildings. Just a matter of taste I guess. I like gmax but can get so far before I start thinking of quiting all together, especially in texturing.
 
Its interesting to note that the Abacus Train Sim Modeler has a choice of the number of sections on all three dimensions when using the box primitive. The program is almost identical, by the same author,as FSDS. After suggesting it several times, I had hoped Abacus would include the change in Version 3. I guess that was too much to ask.
 
FSDS3 and sectional boxes

All,

I must be missing something. A tube with 4 points per section is a box, and can be sectional. Doesn't this solve the problem?

Jim
 
You are, in fact, missing something. In gmax and Train Sim Modeler you can create a box and select the number of sections in the width, height and depth of the box. I know of no way to do that with a four point tube.
 
What's missing in the last few replies (before geocowan) is the prime issue...the originator of this thread was mislead by Brian Fletcher's review of fsds v3 to think that he should spend money on fsds when he was comfortable and happy with GMAX.....so he's looking for his money's value now.

You can't offer him value by pointing out (with your duh's) that fsds can almost do what GMAX can do, when GMAX is free.

Sadly, I couldn't get Brian to see that his review will (and has) mislead gmax users. He made it seem like fsds offered features outside of GMAX when I haven't seen that evidence.

Cheers,
Bob
 
All,

I don't use GMAX, but you are right, most people don't shift from GMAX to FSDS if they are happy. However, I have noted more than one very prolific designer that uses both, noting that there are some things they can do much faster with FSDS.........and vice versa. I am not into scenery or planes heavy enough to need more than one program, so I just use what I started with. I wouldn't dream of saying which is better since I only use FSDS, but most say that is a matter of preference and usage.

In so far as the primitives are for rapid construction of common structures, it would certainly be nice if we had more. But I can make a segmented box of any size fairly fast with a tube, so it is not a big deal...but as pointed out...not ideal.

Best regards,

Jim
 
Jim,

I used to use fsds, and loved it, during a day in which the alternative was VOD. (Rafael, I also loved VOD when the alternative was hand coding scasm using notepad).

Then GMAX was made freely available with many more features and compatibility than fsdsv2. So, I used GMAX. If people wish to return to fsds3, more power to them.

I just feel like reviewers should understand the market standard for "feature sets" before issueing rave review over any given product's feature set. Isn't it a natural assumption we make that reviewers have a perspective against which to review? Shouldn't this perspective be demanded?

Bob
 
Bob,

Yes, I agree. I think a review that recommends one program over another should be made by someone conversant with both, and with strict comparisons made. A feature set may not be the only thing to look at, especially for those who do not make great demands on the programs...ease of use might be more important. But at least one should point out which features compared programs have so that users will know what they will miss with a given selection.

Not strictly on the subject, but somewhat just for sake of conversation, it might be useful for others to know my reasoning for continuing to use FSDS.
From everything I have read, GMAX is more capable than FSDS, but has a steeper learning curve. For me, the learning curve is important, because it really becomes a "relearning" curve, since I am a sporadic object designer. For that reason, FSDS may be a better choice for me, but I really don't know that. But learning a new program, one that is well known for complexity and "a long hard learning curve" doesn't make much sense. If I was into payware, or designed complex structures intensively as a a primary focus, I would definitely learn GMAX, just from what I have read. Or if I find there is something I absolutely want to do, but can't do in FSDS, then I would possibly learn GMAX. At this point, with my sporadic usage, I will just use FSDS until those conditions are met.

Best regards,

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top